What an AI visibility tracker actually does
Search is no longer ten blue links. When someone asks an AI engine "what's the best option for X," it reads a blend of sources and writes one answer that names a few brands — then moves on. Being on that short list is the new page one. An AI visibility tracker is how you find out whether you're on it, for the questions your buyers actually ask.
Concretely, SourceWatch measures four signals you can act on:
- **Mention rate** — how often you're named at all across a fixed set of prompts.
- **Citations** — whether the answer links to your owned content, or just describes you without crediting you. A citation is stronger than a bare mention: it sends real traffic and signals the engine trusts your page.
- **Sentiment** — whether the mention reads positive, neutral or critical. Being named as "the cheap one" is not the same as "the best for teams."
- **Share of voice** — your slice of all brand mentions vs the competitors named instead. This is the number that tells you whether you're winning or losing the category.
Tracker vs checker vs platform
A free AI search visibility checker gives you a one-time snapshot. A *tracker* runs on a schedule and shows the trend, because AI answers drift — ask the same question twice and the wording changes, so a single reading is noise. The broader AI visibility platform wraps tracking, traffic capture and competitor analysis into one place.
Why this matters now: clicks are moving into the answer
This isn't a hypothetical shift — it's measured. When Google shows an AI summary, users click a traditional link only about 8% of the time, versus 15% when no summary appears — nearly half. Clicks *inside* the AI summary happen just 1% of the time. Roughly one in five Google searches already produced an AI summary, and 58% of users hit at least one.
8% vs 15%
Google link-click rate with an AI summary vs without; clicks inside the summary happen ~1% of the time (Pew Research, 2025)
And the traffic that does flow from AI is real, growing, and worth winning. AI referral traffic to websites grew roughly 7x between early 2024 and mid-2025. ChatGPT alone drives about 87% of AI referral traffic across key industries — and that traffic converts at ~7.1%, second only to paid search. Being cited isn't a vanity metric; it's a high-intent acquisition channel that didn't exist three years ago.
Why track all four engines, not just ChatGPT
The share of generative-AI traffic is shifting fast: ChatGPT has been falling as a share of gen-AI web traffic while Gemini and Claude climb (Similarweb). A ChatGPT-only tool measures a shrinking slice. SourceWatch tracks ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and Claude so your visibility data follows the buyers, not yesterday's leader.
The two things prompt-scraping tools can't do
Almost every AI visibility tool works the same way: it fires synthetic prompts at the LLMs and scrapes the answers. That's useful, and SourceWatch does it too. But it's an *inference* — a sample of what the model might say, not a record of what actually happened on your site. SourceWatch adds two things that require being on your own analytics, which a prompt-scraper structurally cannot reach.
Moat 1 — First-party AI traffic, verified, not inferred
When an AI engine reads or cites your site, its crawler hits your pages and its answers send real referral clicks. SourceWatch captures both from your own first-party data via a one-line snippet or a Cloudflare Worker — and verifies each hit against published vendor IP ranges, so a spoofed user-agent pretending to be GPTBot doesn't pollute your numbers. That's ground truth: the real bots that crawled you and the real visitors who arrived from AI, separated from the fakes. Prompt-scraping tools can't show this because it doesn't live in the model — it lives in your logs.
Why "verified vs inferred" is the whole game on accuracy
Synthetic sampling can be badly wrong. One review caught a prompt-sampling tool undercounting a brand's ChatGPT mentions by roughly 97%. First-party capture isn't a sample — it's the actual event, so it doesn't drift with prompt selection or model mood.
Moat 2 — It works inside Claude Code (MCP-native)
SourceWatch ships an MCP server, so your AI visibility data is readable and actionable from inside Claude Code — your assistant can pull your citation gaps and the real queries the models ran, and help you act on them in the same loop, not just stare at a dashboard. Among self-serve tools this is effectively unique; the only comparable agent stack is enterprise-only and gated behind a separate subscription.
What SourceWatch does NOT do (so you can choose with eyes open)
It does not generate content for you — it tells you exactly what to write and where the gaps are, but you (or your team, or your assistant) write it. There is no public REST API yet; access today is via MCP, with a REST surface on the roadmap. The free audit covers a single page; full-site auditing is on the trial. And no honest tool can promise a Google Knowledge Panel or guaranteed ROI — anyone who does is selling you a coin flip.
How SourceWatch tracks your AI visibility
Connect once and the loop runs itself — no tags to babysit, no spreadsheets, no per-page code.
- 1
Define your prompts
List the questions your buyers actually ask AI — discovery ("best X for Y"), comparison ("X vs Z"), and use-case ("how do I…"). SourceWatch can suggest a starter set from your site.
- 2
Run them across the engines, on a schedule
The same prompts fire at ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and Claude weekly by default (daily is an upsell), so readings are comparable over time instead of one-off snapshots.
- 3
Measure mentions, citations & share of voice
For every run SourceWatch scores your mention rate, who got cited, sentiment, and your share of voice against a fixed competitor roster — the trend line, not just today's number.
- 4
Cross-reference with real AI traffic
It ties the answers to the verified AI crawlers and AI-referral clicks hitting your site, so you see not just "am I cited?" but "is it sending traffic?" — and you can act on it in Claude Code via MCP.
See where you stand right now. Run a free AI SEO audit — it checks whether AI engines can read and recognize one page of your site in about 15 seconds, no card required.
Run a free AI SEO auditWho it's for
SourceWatch scales from a single brand to a full agency. The buyer is usually plain-spoken — searching "how do I show up in AI search" or "how to track AI mentions," not "generative engine optimization."
- **Solo brands & in-house marketers** — one site, the core engines, your first result in about 15 minutes. Start on Starter.
- **Growing brands** — more prompts, more sites, and Gemini added as you expand coverage. Start on Growth.
- **Agencies & multi-brand teams** — pooled prompts across up to 10 sites with white-label reports clients can open under your brand. Start on Agency.
- **Enterprise** — all engines, negotiated volume, and a committed plan.
Pricing, in one glance
Flat plans priced on value, with cost caps that keep them honest — generous on weekly tracking (cheap) and tight on the expensive levers (daily runs and Claude). Positioned at the top of medium: far below the enterprise leaders, above the budget scrapers. Every plan includes unlimited seats and a 14-day free trial, card optional.
| Plan | Price | Engines | Sites | Weekly prompts | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Starter | $99/mo | ChatGPT + Perplexity | 1 | 20 | Solo brands & in-house |
| Growth | $349/mo | + Gemini | 3 | 75 | Growing brands |
| Agency | $699/mo | 3 engines, pooled | 10 | 200 | Agencies, white-label |
| Enterprise | from $1,500/mo | All engines | Custom | Negotiated | Large teams |
**Add-ons** layer on without changing the base plan: Claude premium prompts ($80/site/mo), an extra Gemini engine on Starter (+$39/mo), and extra sites (+$39–49/mo each). Claude is held out of base tiers on purpose — it costs far more per check than the other engines, so bundling it everywhere would quietly wreck the economics. See full pricing for the detail.
Where SourceWatch sits vs the category
The market runs from budget scrapers (~$29/mo) to enterprise platforms ($2,000/mo and up, often sales-gated annual contracts). SourceWatch lands in the self-serve sweet spot with two things the cheap tools lack — verified first-party traffic and MCP — and without the price tag, sales process, and platform bloat of the enterprise tier.
Explore the toolkit
This page is the hub. Each job below has a page of its own:
- **AI SEO tool** — the all-in-one view of your AI search performance.
- **AI search visibility checker** — run a quick visibility check on demand.
- **AI search visibility tool** — ongoing tracking across the engines.
- **AI share of voice** — your slice of mentions vs named competitors.
- **ChatGPT brand monitoring** — watch how ChatGPT specifically describes and recommends you.
- **AI citation tracking** — track which answers actually link to your pages.
- **AI visibility platform** — the full platform view for teams.
- **AI SEO services** — done-for-you, including agency white-label.
- **AI SEO API** — MCP-led access today; a REST API is on the roadmap.
Comparing options? See the best AI SEO tools roundup, or the head-to-heads with Semrush, Profound and Conductor.
Ready to see whether AI recommends you? Start a 14-day free trial — card optional, unlimited seats, and your first reading in about 15 minutes.
Start your free trial